in an era of nearly unprecedented economic woes.

here here!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090130/ap_on_bi_ge/earns_exxon_mobil

dead serious, I will throw a fucking block party when someone blows their headquarters to smithereens.

1/30/2009 9:51:29 AM

Good for them, I'm glad someone is making money.

1/30/2009 9:52:15 AM

what, you don't like capitalism?

fuck you commies

1/30/2009 9:52:21 AM

Don't worry without their oil buddy in the whitehouse with members of his Dept. Interior staff sleeping with the oil execs; I doubt the ExXon gravy train will keep running at its current level.

1/30/2009 9:53:30 AM

someone sue them for having too much money. that or get like the EU on their ass or something. Or the RIAA. Get Obama to do something on them.

1/30/2009 9:53:34 AM

i so upset because someone is doing better than me...i dont know how to react expect to cry, whine and scream

1/30/2009 9:54:21 AM

People need to drive

People need to drink

and people need to wipe their ass

Gas, beer and TP companies will always prevail

1/30/2009 9:54:36 AM

Good news those those with their stock.

1/30/2009 9:54:45 AM

Quote :

"what, you don't like capitalism?"

there is a diffrence btw making money via free market capitalism and getting hooked up with "favorable" gov't policy by an oil friendly president.

1/30/2009 9:55:43 AM

god i hate companies that make money. what kind of shit is that??

1/30/2009 9:56:23 AM

Just make 'em fund the bailouts.

1/30/2009 9:56:57 AM

at least Queti is happy i'm sure

1/30/2009 9:57:18 AM

in before the profit percents and price of oil rawr rawr rawr

or am i too late

1/30/2009 10:04:42 AM

Good for them, I'm glad someone is making money.

1/30/2009 10:05:20 AM

oh, you reactionaries.

i've never lost sleep or shed a tear about someone being filthy rich.

personally, I think doctors ought to make at least triple what they make.

I think teachers based on merit ought to be paid at least twice what they make.

I don't think an executive who sits in an office ought to be able to milk a general citizen for all his or her money, impairing their ability to commute, and thusly pad their pockets to the tune of island-buying status. It's THE gross element of capitalism.

I feel the same about professional athletes making millions of dollars.

No, I'm not socialist, and yes, I know what socialism is.

1/30/2009 10:05:50 AM

GENERIC BITCHING AND SOUR GRAPES!!!

1/30/2009 10:05:59 AM

Quote :

"in an era of nearly unprecedented economic woes."

They made their money before the era of unprecendented economic woes.

Their 4Q stunk just like everyone else's.

1/30/2009 10:06:12 AM

Without Exxon your ass would be walking to work

1/30/2009 10:07:16 AM

^that's the shame of it all.

1/30/2009 10:07:48 AM

Quote :

"I feel the same about professional athletes making millions of dollars."

So you think the executives should keep most of that money for themselves and pay athletes 5 figure salaries instead?

1/30/2009 10:07:49 AM

nope. i think their salaries should just be less.

there's no way their salaries come merely from sales revenues, etc.

especially with the way NBA games routinely don't even come close to selling out anymore, generally.

1/30/2009 10:10:07 AM

where, exactly, do you think their salaries are coming from then????

1/30/2009 10:12:30 AM

McDonald's

and Hardee's

1/30/2009 10:13:30 AM

yeah i guess you're right. I mean most of these elite athletes grew up in abject poverty, so anything around $50k or more should be awesome for them.

they don't deserve socioeconomic mobility any more than anyone else.

1/30/2009 10:14:18 AM

they deserve those salaries because they grew up unfortunate?

ok.

i'm exiting.

1/30/2009 10:15:42 AM

They deserve those salaries because that is what the market currently offers them.

1/30/2009 10:16:25 AM

they deserve their salaries because 99.999% of the population cannot do what they can do.

1/30/2009 10:16:56 AM

OH NO THOSE EVIL OIL COMPANIES THAT PROVIDE US WITH EVERYTHING WE USE FROM DAY TO DAY MADE MONEY! DEATH TO BIG OIL


come on dude, stop acting like a bitch

1/30/2009 10:18:22 AM

^^^ Or the market offers them what they deserve, depending on how you want to look at it. Effectively the same thing, I guess.

1/30/2009 10:20:15 AM

pretty much.

1/30/2009 10:20:56 AM

so the implication i should take from you guys is that there AREN'T alternative (cheaper) methods, right?

Right?

I'm not an idiot. I know we need the energy. I know this. I just feel it could be CONSIDERABLY more affordable for the general population if execs from just one company are clearing 45,000,000,000 US dollars in profits. Am I wrong? I may be. I'm ready to be convinced I'm wrong, in a way other than you reactionary hot-heads throwing around "bitch" and "baby" at every turn. At least pretend to be civil. I can be taught, and actually prefer that avenue of discourse.

But wait, that's why you guys are on TWW. To condescend people you'd otherwise say "hey how's it going?" to in live interaction. It's much more fun (adolescent) to just call someone a bitch than to provide some intelligent substance to support your point.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 10:24 AM. Reason : asdfdddd]

1/30/2009 10:22:06 AM

seriously people...be civil

Quote :

"dead serious, I will throw a fucking block party when someone blows their headquarters to smithereens."

1/30/2009 10:23:25 AM

with gas under $2 a gallon, there are really no scalable solutions that are cheaper.

$5/gallon gas was a different story, but now the hedge funds have exited the fray and the artificial inflationary pressures are gone.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 10:24 AM. Reason : adsf]

1/30/2009 10:23:57 AM

lol. point taken, but that was a gross hyperbole.

yes, yes, BobbyDigital, I agree. I can absolutely get down with sub $2/gal gas.

(k I don't understand that jargon)

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 10:25 AM. Reason : asdfasfadddd]

1/30/2009 10:25:01 AM

Before bitching about how much they make, at least research how much they donate, and pay in taxes to our government. you'd be suprised

1/30/2009 10:25:29 AM

Like it or not, gasoline is awfully tough to beat as a bang-for-the-buck automotive fuel.

The fact that no infrastructure is in place to use any other fuel besides electricy (i.e., plug in hybrids, etc...and battery tech is still a limiting factor there) only makes it a tougher problem to crack.

...and yes, sub-$2 gallons of gas aren't going to be economically feasible to replace with another method anytime soon. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be looking at other ways for the future...I'm just saying that $2/gallon gas is an automotive engineer's manna from heaven.


If we didn't demand (both as consumers and as government safety regulators) that cars become progressively heavier and heavier, we'd be halfway home.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 10:29 AM. Reason : fat Americans and their fat cars]

1/30/2009 10:25:32 AM

Quote :

"I doubt the ExXon gravy train will keep running at its current level."

ehehe, eheheheheh, ahahahah, ahahahhahahahahhahahahahahhaha

yeah, ok.

1/30/2009 10:26:03 AM

is it true that Exxon (or some other monster co) owns the patent on the "cheaper" methodology?

I'm sure you guys have heard that as well.

1/30/2009 10:27:24 AM

I guess this was overlooked by the OP:

Quote :

"The extraordinary full-year profit wasn't a surprise given crude's triple-digit price for much of 2008"

1/30/2009 10:28:41 AM

^^ even if that's the case, and they're a full-spectrum energy company in sheep's clothing, they'll start using the other method as soon as it's economically feasible (i.e., not with $2/gallon gas on the market, just begging to be burned)

1/30/2009 10:31:35 AM

Quote :

"(k I don't understand that jargon)"

There was a 60 minutes investigation into how the oil/gas prices sky rocketed so quickly and then collapsed so quickly, and ultimately, it was investors on wall street who were buying up so much oil that the prices skyrocketed due to an artificial scarcity.

it's probably still viewable on their site. it aired like maybe 2 weeks ago. It was stuff that's been known for a while, but no mainstream media had really picked it up until then.

1/30/2009 10:31:59 AM

Quote :

"I'm not an idiot. I know we need the energy. I know this. I just feel it could be CONSIDERABLY more affordable for the general population if execs from just one company are clearing 45,000,000,000 US dollars in profits. Am I wrong?"

The execs aren't clearing $45B. Exxon stockholders are clearing like 2 something a share or whatever it said in the article.

1/30/2009 10:32:13 AM

so what are the major influences of barrel prices, anyway? I did overlook that. Arguably, 100% of that profit came in the first 3 quarters. Market fears can alter oil prices that drastically? I've never understood that. Hurricanes, turm(oil) in the middle east, etc. . .is it basically just that the procurers of the oil can name whatever fucking price they want if their region is threatened?

Quote :

"prices skyrocketed due to an artificial scarcity"

frightening how fickle it is. aren't there ways to ensure it's a more static price point? that's always been insane to me.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 10:35 AM. Reason : asdfdfff]

1/30/2009 10:33:04 AM

i dont think the producers set the price, like other products

investors set the price for commodoties

1/30/2009 10:35:10 AM

I am in your fucking boat, Joel. So where are we going?

1/30/2009 10:35:41 AM

if investors set the price, doesn't that imply that they--the ones who are in the game to make profits--can set it to whatever amount of money they want?

1/30/2009 10:36:32 AM

i'm going to let someone who understands it field that one

1/30/2009 10:37:24 AM

LAWL

and for the reactionary comments, I digress.

I started this thread from a reactionary corner, clearly.

my apologies.

1/30/2009 10:38:39 AM

Quote :

"if investors set the price, doesn't that imply that they--the ones who are in the game to make profits--can set it to whatever amount of money they want?"

The price is market driven like any other commodity, including the food we eat.

The problem is when the market is overloaded with investors who are not buying off the market for consumption but in order to hold on to the products and then sell them back on the same market at a higher price.

the CFTC is supposed to oversee the commodities futures market and prevent excess speculation, but the laws are poorly worded and terms such as "excess speculation" are not clearly defined, effectively rendering such federal oversight organizations as powerless.

1/30/2009 10:47:35 AM

my mind was just blown

I feel like I divided by zero after reading ^

1/30/2009 10:48:57 AM